Late Friday, Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein announced they will vote in favor of confirming Judge Michael Mukasey for the attorney general post. And over the weekend, there's been a lot of chatter on the blogs.

I believe that Mukasey, as an individual, is exceptionally well qualified to serve as attorney general. I would approve the Mukasey who says he "personally" finds waterboarding abhorrent. But I am troubled by the "official" Mukasey who is being trotted out as something different. And I believe that the nation cannot, at this stage, accept the appointment of an attorney general who refuses to come clean on the torture issue.

In his blog for The Nation, John Nichols calls for a do-over: "Mukasey's critics on the committee, led by Leahy and Feingold, should do everything in their power to re-frame the debate to focus on the broader question of whether a president can break the law - and on the nominee's entirely unacceptable answers to it."

Before the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee completely cave-in to Bush, at minimum they should demand that Judge Mukasey appoint a special prosecutor to investigate if war crimes have been committed. If Mukasey refuses he should be rejected. This, indeed, should be a pre-condition to anyone filling the post of Attorney General under Bush.